The Authority of Foundation Presidents

1. Chapter 5 – The Authority of Foundation Presidents The Authority of Foundation Presidents Based on Unequal Partners: American Foundations and Higher Education Development in Africa by Dr. Fabrice Jaumont

2. Chapter 5 – The Authority of Foundation Presidents The Authority of Foundation Presidents • Foundation presidents, although not typically involved in day-to-day operations, help set and attain the foundation’s goals.  • Each of the eight foundation leaders in the Partnership for Higher Education in Africa influenced the strategies and initiatives of the organizations.  • Information on leadership was gathered via interviews with program officers, foundation experts, and university administrators, as well as research through the Partnership’s archives at Columbia University which contained reports, memos, emails and correspondences documenting its decade-long existence. Based on Unequal Partners: American Foundations and Higher Education Development in Africa by Dr. Fabrice Jaumont

3. Chapter 5 – The Authority of Foundation Presidents Foundation Leadership from University Leadership When the Partnership for Higher Education in Africa was launched, every sitting foundation president was a former university president. Based on Unequal Partners: American Foundations and Higher Education Development in Africa by Dr. Fabrice Jaumont

4. Chapter 5 – The Authority of Foundation Presidents The Foundation-University Relationship • Through their connection to universities, foundations gain access to knowledge, cutting-edge research, and networks of leading experts and scholars in areas which they want to change.   • In exchange, universities gain access to funds to start new projects, develop existing initiatives, or build institutional capacity.  • Both gain reputation and prestige, and at times an exchange in personnel as foundation leaders and program directors are hired from within academic circles.  • This creates a situation where foundations and universities mirror each other in structure and philosophy, allowing for easier collaboration. Based on Unequal Partners: American Foundations and Higher Education Development in Africa by Dr. Fabrice Jaumont

5. Chapter 5 – The Authority of Foundation Presidents Personal Relationships, Personal Investment • The idea behind the Partnership for Higher Education first emerged in a like-minded conversation between the presidents of Carnegie and Rockefeller.  • They both had the desire and background to develop of higher education, and felt by working together they could leverage funds and compound their reputation and influence.  • Thus, the Partnership became a vehicle to promote their own interest in higher education through initiatives that the foundations would support jointly in order to reach the presidents’ ambitious goals.  • As their ambitions grew to solving the issue of higher education in Africa, they turned to inter-foundation partnerships and encouraged collaboration between the public and private sectors.  Based on Unequal Partners: American Foundations and Higher Education Development in Africa by Dr. Fabrice Jaumont

6. Chapter 5 – The Authority of Foundation Presidents The Partnership’s Vision  • The Presidents sought to demonstrate that universities in Africa could play a bigger role in the economic development of the continent, and that focus shouldn’t rest solely on basic education.  • This vision for higher education in Africa was then handed to the program officers and program directors that represented their foundations at the Partnership’s table.  • Directors and program officers were expected to run the day to day operations of the Partnership, and determine as the details of the organization were formed what the presidents wanted. Based on Unequal Partners: American Foundations and Higher Education Development in Africa by Dr. Fabrice Jaumont

7. Chapter 5 – The Authority of Foundation Presidents Administrative Variables • The level of autonomy any given employee has varies widely from one foundation to another.  • Consequently, decisions were not easily green-lighted by the Partnership’s participants, or their hierarchies.   • In addition, each foundation president delegated power in his or her own way, leading to unequal levels of autonomy among program directors.  • In most cases, this meant that while strategies could be discussed, nothing could be decided until the respective parties took the ideas back to the presidents for approval. Based on Unequal Partners: American Foundations and Higher Education Development in Africa by Dr. Fabrice Jaumont

8. Chapter 5 – The Authority of Foundation Presidents Board Composition • Boards of trustees may include members of the founder’s family or university presidents.   • It is not unusual that a foundation board member, or even a senior staff, sits on another foundation’s board.  • Boards also include experts in a given field, artists, scientists, and legal counselors, and in most cases boards include corporate executives. Based on Unequal Partners: American Foundations and Higher Education Development in Africa by Dr. Fabrice Jaumont

9. Chapter 5 – The Authority of Foundation Presidents The Board’s Influence • The board’s decisions can have a bearing on the foundation’s organizational structure and decision-making process.  • They set the foundation’s grantmaking and programmatic strategies, as well as offers stewardship on financial and human resources matters.  • The board also hires the foundation’s chief executive, who typically have been in the humanities or social sciences, with a few notable exceptions. Based on Unequal Partners: American Foundations and Higher Education Development in Africa by Dr. Fabrice Jaumont

10. Chapter 5 – The Authority of Foundation Presidents Board Accountability • During his 6-years at Ford, Luis Ubiñas conducted a large internal restructuring that reduced drastically the number of initiatives supported by Ford.   • This in turn was problematic for presidents who had to justify the validity of partnering with other foundations to their board.   • Several foundation boards made it difficult for presidents if the goal of leveraging funds was not clearly attained.  • Additionally, the boards expected high impact similar to what the Partnership was able to accomplish with the Bandwidth Consortium.  Based on Unequal Partners: American Foundations and Higher Education Development in Africa by Dr. Fabrice Jaumont

11. Chapter 5 – The Authority of Foundation Presidents The Need to Demonstrate Results • Certain initiatives were given preference over others.  • For instance, the presidents wanted to put more emphasis on economies of scale using a market-based and technology-based approach to achieving high impact.  • For some foundations, this focus came directly from their board which were often composed of economists or business leaders.  • The pressure to attain major breakthroughs quickly meant moving away from traditional strategies towards clear and measurable indicators of impact.  • This in turn meant embarking upon endeavors outside of their comfort zone. Based on Unequal Partners: American Foundations and Higher Education Development in Africa by Dr. Fabrice Jaumont

12. Chapter 5 – The Authority of Foundation Presidents Volatile Project Implementation • Expanding internet bandwidth for African universities was a main concern of the presidents and as such it became a key initiative called the Internet Bandwidth Consortium.  • Conversely, the Higher Education Advocacy and Research Network which originally sought to support and strengthen education schools and African higher education as a field of studies was unpopular among boards and presidents, and was among the projects that were dropped or revised extensively.  • Market-based importance and the promise of delivering quantifiable results became strong motivating factors. Based on Unequal Partners: American Foundations and Higher Education Development in Africa by Dr. Fabrice Jaumont

13. Chapter 5 – The Authority of Foundation Presidents The Changing Faces of Foundations • At the beginning of the twenty-first century many international foundations were re-evaluating the purpose and relevance of their foundations’ mission.  • This often manifested itself in a preference for market-based and technology-based strategies and measurable indicators of success.  •  The more traditional approaches of foundations were often criticized for lacking tangible results. Based on Unequal Partners: American Foundations and Higher Education Development in Africa by Dr. Fabrice Jaumont

14. Chapter 5 – The Authority of Foundation Presidents Views on the Future of African Higher Education • The Partnership’s stated goal was to help universities become “engines of development” on the African continent.  • The case for higher education development on economic rather than cultural grounds often created conflict between boards and presidents, who commonly had backgrounds in the humanities.  • Large foundations, similar to universities, have traditionally resisted pressures towards these business-oriented ideals, continue to do so.  • The tension between preserving this difference and aligning to a market-based approach had a bearing on both the Partnership’s results and the results of each individual foundation. Based on Unequal Partners: American Foundations and Higher Education Development in Africa by Dr. Fabrice Jaumont

15. Chapter 5 – The Authority of Foundation Presidents Institutional Challenges Faced by the Partnership • Unclear objectives, technical obstacles to achieve joint funding, and the failure to expand the Partnership’s resources hindered the successful realization of their vision.  • There was limited consensus and a low probability of collaboration, as there were few initiatives that involved more than two or three foundations.  • Moreover, six years is the maximum time for a particular project to be supported by a foundation, creating a need for short-term results when considering their boards’ expectations. Based on Unequal Partners: American Foundations and Higher Education Development in Africa by Dr. Fabrice Jaumont

16. Chapter 5 – The Authority of Foundation Presidents Connecting with African Governments • The Partnership foundations tried to make the case to governments and international donors that the universities could be engines of economic growth in Africa, not just institutions that trained civil servants.  • This is a notion that is still not well understood by African governments, nor even within the African university community.   • To get government support, however, universities would need to train sufficient numbers of scientists or engineers in areas of science and engineering that are directly relevant to economic growth Based on Unequal Partners: American Foundations and Higher Education Development in Africa by Dr. Fabrice Jaumont

17. Chapter 5 – The Authority of Foundation Presidents Petitioning the Presidents • Staff often found themselves petitioning the presidents for certain changes. For example, the hiring of additional administrative staff to manage the Partnership itself was originally declined, and then approved after a joint recommendation of staff changed their views.  • Agreement among program officers also became a pre-requisite for responding to the presidents’ criticism and divergent views.  • The secretariat and officers would have time to present to the presidents of the collective Partnership foundations annually, and would receive a collective communication from the presidents explaining how they wanted the program officers to proceed. Based on Unequal Partners: American Foundations and Higher Education Development in Africa by Dr. Fabrice Jaumont

18. Chapter 5 – The Authority of Foundation Presidents Communication Difficulties • The direction from the presidents wasn’t always clear, which often impaired the effectiveness of the executive committee.  • With a few exceptions, many of the presidents were aware of what the Partnership was doing, as after the initial commitment they went on to other projects and didn’t stay involved in the Partnership’s day-to-day affairs. Based on Unequal Partners: American Foundations and Higher Education Development in Africa by Dr. Fabrice Jaumont

19. Chapter 5 – The Authority of Foundation Presidents Termination of the Partnership • When new presidents took over at the Ford nor Rockefeller foundations towards the end second phase of the Partnership, they didn’t have the same commitment previous leaders did to the original vision.  • As new presidents came on board at various foundations, they all wanted to leave their own unique footprint.  • The presidents of the Partnership’s foundations decided to close the Partnership secretariat and not embark on a third formal phase with a public pledge of funding. Based on Unequal Partners: American Foundations and Higher Education Development in Africa by Dr. Fabrice Jaumont

20. Chapter 5 – The Authority of Foundation Presidents Effects of Closing the Partnership • The general feeling among program officers was that they were becoming more effective as a group, and terminating the Partnership put program officers in an awkward position with their grantees.   • Justifying the decision to end ten years of collaboration undermined their position with partners on the ground and the sustainability of various projects.  • As described in a final report the decision to terminate the Partnership left the program officers “scrambling to explain the implications of the decision with their grantee organizations including how those organizations could sustain the work.”  Based on Unequal Partners: American Foundations and Higher Education Development in Africa by Dr. Fabrice Jaumont